1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Sacred status of ancient documents

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by 22zg2293, Oct 22, 2018.

  1. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    3,327
    Ratings:
    +417
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    They wer chosen based on figuring out what books wer written by witnesses or had witness approval.
     
  2. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    31,485
    Ratings:
    +3,612
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    But, wait! Much of the Bible was written by non eyewitnesses and without eyewitness approval.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    31,485
    Ratings:
    +3,612
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    Were they?
     
  4. 74x12

    74x12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2017
    Messages:
    2,072
    Ratings:
    +477
    Religion:
    Itiswhatitis
    Well how would you review it?

    You know Moses met God face to face on the mountain. Or Elijah for example talked directly to God on the mountain. How could you decide what is "sacred" unless you talk to God?
     
  5. sayak83

    sayak83 Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Messages:
    8,030
    Ratings:
    +7,337
    Religion:
    Pluralist Hindu
    What makes only ancient documents sacred.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. blü 2

    blü 2 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    3,409
    Ratings:
    +2,040
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    Well, the NT is a collection of documents selected according to the religious politics of the selectors ─ that is, of a particular group, time and place.

    However there wasn't then and there isn't now any objective criterion that would allow the process to be done impartially.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  7. paarsurrey

    paarsurrey Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    14,689
    Ratings:
    +1,373
    Paul was not an eyewitness of the Jesus' accounts, and Luke* was also not an eyewitness.
    Regards
    ___________
    *"Some scholars[103][104] uphold the traditional claim that Luke the Evangelist, an associate of St. Paul who was probably not an eyewitness to Jesus' ministry, wrote the Gospel of Luke and Acts of the Apostles. Others point out that Acts contradicts Paul's own letters and denies him the important title of apostle, suggesting that the author was not a companion of Paul's.[105]
    As is the case with all the Gospels, it is unknown exactly when the Gospel of Luke was written. Scholars have proposed a range of dates from as early as 60 AD to well into the second century, but the majority of recent critical scholars favour late 1st-century dates after 70 AD".[106][107][108][109]
    Historical reliability of the Gospels - Wikipedia
     
  8. Kelly of the Phoenix

    Kelly of the Phoenix Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,874
    Ratings:
    +2,586
    Religion:
    "Post" Christian, likely Deist
    Another possibility is that Paul didn't always read what Luke was writing. That's what happens when you just don't do it yourself. :)
     
Loading...